call. i just put up a special thread on gretawire. i want to know your favorite segment tonight. tomorrow night we have a special show. second term scandals hitting the white house. tomorrow night, 10:00 p.m. see you then. mr. mcgoo. wait will you see the case history on this. you'll go nuts. >> greg: i'm greg gutfeld. it's 5:00 in new york city and it is raining! >> greg: world need radical islam, radical islam meet world. thanks to the video of the knife attack, they can't do the sugar coating of the muslim threat. for many this is close look of a bona fide class of civilization. sweden used to be a bland cute country and now they have riots.
u.k. suburbs used to be a way where old folks wiled away their years. we'll happily ignore you if you enter the 21st century or even the seventh. intrusive west, why are the islamists brutalizing christians in their own country that are eth any kli egyptian and act like egyptians but they go to church but not a mosque. why iran expelled all its jews. it's poor intolerance. muslim supremacistist or the rock stars. the west planted a flag on the moon. they planted a flag in the chest of film maker theo van gogh and killed him. calling them out into the world of pc jew sit sue makes you a bigot while your leaders mince words.
are they really terrorists? you got a guy drenched in british blood yelling allah akbar waging jihad. another place of workplace violence. one thing that drove me crazy. troops in london are not advised to wear their uniforms. generally they say this in foreign lands. this is their own country. >> it's disgraceful. that is what makes this attack different, greg. they are going after what would typically be heroes and doing it a way not that is typical. there are not planes going into buildings, not bombs going off. this is against people. we see riots in sweden today because radical muslims are upset somebody on their side was
shot. when somebody gets shot, they are allowed to riot. it's really disgraceful. i have followed it a little bit. there was no blaming it on a red herring. is he a terrorist or is he not? it didn't take five days for them to come out and denounce this. kudos to the british. we can learn a thing or two. >> greg: guardian had an article by glen greenwald and what is the definition of terrorism if you exclude the acts of the u.s. people that buy terror and wage terror are the same because civilians die on both sides. do you buy that? >> bob: a couple of things. first of all it seems to me if the guy doesn't make like the west, why is he the west? you raised one thing the way that radical islamists cheat
christians. it is wrong part of muslim culture to do that. yet i've not heard a single leader of a muslim country or a single cleric stand up and say, this is wrong. i find that just disgraceful. we are christians and we have a right to have our religion wherever we are. if we want to practice, but we can't practice ours? to hell with them. >> greg: eric, they are british. they are talking about british invading their home country. what does that mean? it's about an ideology. >> eric: that is all it is. these guys are muslim terrorists. they are indock at any rate by "inspire magazine," online magazine and radicalized and they kill people and that the definition of terror. then when they say allah akbar, they are muslim terrorists.
call it what it is. mainstream media we're not sure whether they were terrorists or not. you can go to the textbook and look up radical extremistsist terrorists and find what they did. it's no different than nadal did. he stood up, 12 or 13 people, 30 people injured, 12, okay, but we have to call it workplace violence because we are afraid to call what it is. or "b", president obama doesn't want to admit he had a terrorist attack under his watch and he wants to call it something else. a lost people like me are pushing back on that characterization. >> greg: dana, i wanted to run this clip, the mother who tried to leave with this scumbag on the street after he committed a horrible crime. >> all he said, i killed him.
why? because it was british soldier, he killed people. he killed muslim people in muslim countries and have nothing to do. >> were y scared for yourself, why not? because and more and more people stalking around. i talk to him and then i ask him what he wanted. >> greg: you see this. it could have gone another way. >> dana: it could have. you have the british upper lip. she was a model for all of lot of people. >> greg: i wouldn't want my mom to do that. >> dana: your mom probable would have done it. it's her instinct to go with that. what is additionally disturbing the reason you are able to call a spade a spade here, the terrorists uses the media to
make his point. he walks calmly to the camera and makes a pronouncement. if we are who want to fight terrorism if you are not pc enough, you mince words and cloud it in things, then we need to use the media like the terrorists are using against us. that works in a lot of different ways. he didn't mince words when he was talking to the camera there. >> greg: no. i wonder if the media should play the tape so does it feed into it? >> andrea: i think people should see it. they need to see the threats. >> dana: it is dark. >> andrea: and it's rough but it allows an opportunity, a teachable moment as the white house would say. what disappoints me most, when president obama had a chance to acknowledge it, fort hood, boston, benghazi, and when he
gave that speech in cairo. instead, he stood in front of the muslim world and he said we have a shared history of tolerance. that is just not true. >> bob: first thing i thought about, i needed to translate with a british lady. i couldn't understand what she was saying. this is a product of the british allowing muslims to come into their country and establish, you see the areas that are all muslim. we can't do that going the other way. i took so much heat for the idea not having student visas for two years i was dumped on from every direction. you need to take a hard look at our immigration policy, if they are going to preach high tread to us and they turn to the be radicals, should we do it? they are lucky. >> they found a british muslim
terrorist that used a macete or ours use pressure cookers that try to kill people at the end of marathon. we have to call it what it is. president obama could not say there is a war on terror. he had a stage. he could absolutely said it's time to stop this terrorism and end the war on terror. >> dana: president obama was in line with david cameron. >> bob: he hasn't denounced terrorism? >> eric: if he does that we could do things like send enemy combatants to gitmo. >> dana: he hated it from beginning because george bush said it. >> greg: let's see what david cameron had to say. >> first, this country will be
resolute in the stand against violence, extremism and terror. we will never give into terror or terrorism in any form. second, this view is sliard by every community in our country. >> greg: there a difference between cameron and obama. >> andrea: the difference is the word islam. radical islam i can terror he will not say those words. i commend you bob, i agree with you on the immigration point. this is how it started in europe. immigration allowing them to come carte blanche to allow them to work. they stayed and kids are radicalized. we are at risk of the same thing >> greg: could i read a statement. this is the family, lee was soier that was brutally murdered. it's important and he the victim. lee was lovely. he would do anything for anybody. he always looked after his sisters and always protected
them. he took a big brother role with everyone. all he wanted to do was be in the army. he wanted to live life and enjoy himself. his family meant everything to him. he was loving son father and uncle and brother to many. we ask that his privacy be respected at this time. >> bob: i go back in history and say, on the toman empire tried to take over. they got as far as spain, if i remember. they took over big swathes of europe. there is somewhere they are trying to do it all over again. >> dana: strange thing is terrorists here, he was born in britain. okay? when you think of the boston bombers, they are not born in america. it's second generation and self-radicalization. i'm not buying the self-radicalization. >>. >> when you said they can't win,
they are fighting avenue, they are using our tolerance because we're scared of being called islamic phobic. >> bob: i know you blame obama about that. particularly all the liberals have the same view about this. we don't like terror and we don't like christians being beat up and murdered by muslim fanatics and they better stop. >> dana: we're going to talk about that later. >> greg: coming up. she plead the fifth to get out of answering questions about the irs. lois lerner may have botched her opportunity to remain silent and could be back on the hill. details next on the five. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ break on through the other side ♪ ♪ break on through to the other side ♪ ♪
this is a fox news alert. they just confirmed lois lerner directly targeted conservatives have been placed on administrative leave. she walked in yesterday's hearing on capitol hill thinking she would plead the fifth without having to answer questions. but that may not be the end of it for lerner. she gave a statement to while she was pleading the fifth and because of that some lawmakers she waived her right to refuse to testify. eric, it looks like chairman issa is planning to o issuing a subpoena to bring her back to the hill. what do you think? she is going to get paid. if she do nothing wrong,
shouldn't she just testify? >> eric: couple of thoughts, she is still under subpoena. so he can just call her back. whether or not she can plead the fifth is the big question. they may bring her back and plead the fifth and at some point you have to testify because you breached because of your statement or held in contempt. what is the problem with the truth? why can't they come to the truth? why can't at the tell us what happened? is the truth so dangerous that by revealing it you are going to hurt lerner herself or white house or many other people? i find it curious the white house position has changed so many times. when it first came out, president obama i first heard about it on tv. then the white house counsel got word the irs was doing it. now, the white house counsel and chief of staff who knows. what is it? just tell us the real story and let us decide.
>> andrea: when you have nancy pelosi, she is fine, listen. it was interesting what she did. >> i had people take the fifth in front of the committee and it's really interesting. i don't know, it's in the public interest, it's not like somebody has some culpability like the inspector said, nothing really was done. but i would say to the american people deserves answers. >> andrea: when you lost nancy pelosi, do you think it's the strategy to make the speech and plead the fifth? >> bob: her strategy made no sense, she made an opening statement and pled the fifth. think a special prosecutor. this is potentially damaging political problem. wait to solve it is to get a special prosecutor and get the answer to this thing out. i do not believe president obama was involved in organized this
to happen but i would like for his sake and his administration's sake to find out what happened, a special prosecutor a person with integrity will find that out. >> dana: the inspector general of the irs, doesn't he just gets the facts. he doesn't find out how did this happen, why did it happen. i find it hard to believe that lerner dreamed this up on her own. it's hard to believe. she is an accomplished woman but i don't think she could have done it. the other problem is fairness issue, she didn't respect and her office respect the first amendment rights of other people. why should she get to exercise her fifth amendment right. whether it's legal or not, that is beside the point to p.r., mandatory and more people were targeted. national review posted a piece about parents who had adopted children. they were singled out for special scrutiny because they were adopting children.
that is why, it's not just a political problem for the government. it's actually undermining very sacred relationship between united states citizen and its government. they have right to know what the government is doing. it goes yong politics but i think they are big political fix. >> greg: lerner, she is a small potatoes. it's not about the irs. it's about an administration's effort to silence people who disagree with the administration. irs and department of justice have become weaponized agencies for obama. executive branch have become their own separate drones. and white house coming out against bullying, remember that, now they are the bullies. it's not a bully-pulpit, its
bully aircraft carrier. >> i don't want a special prosecutor. number one, special prosecutor is going to be appointed appointed whei bie the white house. as soon as they get appointed, we can't discuss it, it's an ongoing investigation. number three if you finally get to what really happened the truth, it could be two or three years down the road. i have more faith in darrell issa of firing these people to the stand one after the other, finally someone will raise their hand and tell the truth. >> bob: the inspector general who they are hanging a lot of hopes on onlynvestigates the internal revenue service. that is what inspector generals are for. that is why i think you need a special prosecutor that can broadly look at this thing. i don't put my chips in issa's basket but a personal of
integrity is needed here to get behind them. >> bush back, bush back, bob. special prosecutors have not always been successful. if you appoint one, it's off the front pages and you never hear about it again. i do not think a special prosecutor shou be the route they go. >> greg: it's got to be public. for the american public to understand the toxic nature of a bloated government you have to pull the rock and look underneath the rock and see what is there. special prosecutor puts paper around it. >> bob: you put it in the hands of a partisan committee? >> let's just say somebody from the justice department that looks into it. it's not a special prosecutor but some sort of different entity. the reason it is important, the i.g. only looks at irs and on national review you had the woman that was targeted by the irs.
and epa and attf all at the same time. there are multiple agencies targeting the same people. that is not a coincidence. somebody outside of the irs has to look at it. >> this one might be big enough, they decide to do investigating. >> andrea: if they don't appoint a special prosecutor, if obamacare fails which it will, they will blame out on the hearings. we just learned, lois ler never will be on administrative leave on with pay. your taxpayer dollars. how do you like that? some important developments on the obama administration spying on the fox news channel. lawmakers are trying to make sure it never happens to fox or any other journalists exercising theirs first amendment rights.
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ for years the obama administration has trying to marginalize fox news. >> fox news operates as the research arm or the communication arm of the republican party. >> president will say, it's not a news organization so much as it has a perspective. >> they are not really a news station. >> i have one television station entirely devoted to attacking my administration. that is pretty big megaphone. >> dana: ha, ha, didn't work out
very well to them. most of the stories we have been talking about, in the show so far were reported by fox news reporters, turns out one of them james rosen who has been gets targeted by the justice department and his phone records. we'll get more into detail later a bipartisan group of lawmakers to prevent this from happening again which i find weird, we already have a law that prevents this. it's called the first amendment. we don't need another law. >> greg: this is great because it really got to drive everybody else in the media crazy because the way the white house looks at fox news is the way they should look at the press. it should be an adversarial relationship and almost as though obama is saying, i really don't respect you enough to fear you. every time he makes light of fox news, it means fox news is doing their job. its dream of the past.
it's not attention is not arguing it's about silence. groups of media matters are devoted to silence fox news. goes back to the glorious time in the garden of liberal eden before there was talk radio with all media was liberal. they wanted to go back to that. >> dana: there were 17 democrats and three republicans which to me they didn't do enough work. >> bob: that bill has been sitting around for several years. white house said they would support it and sign it when through. it's more complicated as saying the first amendment because you are dealing with a series of highly complex intelligence issues that you do need very specific guidelines for the journalists. i think good news about this for fox news is that rosen has been championed by most of the other press corps who feel the same. >> dana: "new york times" editorial page.
>> bob: yes. >> dana: let me get eric's thoughts. this is list of phone records we know that the justice department was looking at. numbers that received fox big network, fox news washington bureau, rosen's cellphone, his parents' home. white house bureau and state department bureau where fox and other media outlets have offices. eric, have you ever seen mainstream media unify and got behind this. >> eric: let's make sure they don't overplay their hand. look, that is disturbing enough. what gets thrown around. maybe ro seven, his phone numbers were traced but tracked. look at that. that list showed literally hundreds of lines that could have been watched. >> we talked about this
yesterday they used espionage act to get access to these numbers. that is big. james rosen is being the search warrant that was issued to rosen where is the same treatment to the people who leaked president obama's killers. i'll say on the front page of the "new york times." the reporter that broke the story. where is the espionage act aapplied there? >> bob: it was enacted back in 1938. you need new legislation to update that. >> dana: you have been a press secretary and reporters not against the law. that is what they do. sometimes it's a bummer they find out something that was supposed to be a secret program. if it goes forward you don't targeted them and then afterwards. >> andrea: the way the affidavit reads, you would think rosen is in the kgb. slighted rick.
he can change disguises. there is nothing criminal about the whole thing. there is nothing he has done in his reporting that is criminal whatsoever, nothing has to do with criminal behavior. i will point out this. white house does like some members of the media. on monday when they were drowning in scandals they had some liberal reporters for a secret meeting at the white house. jonathan kapart and sha=/l( was spotted going in. next day, some nice headlines for the president. >> bob: it was 1917 for the act, not 1938. if you are going to be doing things, you need to do it under an act that is modernized. >> greg: more support for my belief punish ground and ground them for one year, put salt
peter in their diet and block all aspects of expansion. measures can actually do this. announce a moratorium on any government action. >> can we do three years? >> one year. >> i think will you get this on the twitter. >> bob: you vote. the government is get when you vote. >> dana: this is a good discussion. directly ahead the president gave a speech today on terrorism but was it an attempt to distract all of us from the scandals that are plaguing the administration? we'll discuss that next. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> president obama just announced kill naturalized terrorists like anwar al-awlaki. what? we already knew that. "new york times" led with that two years ago? never mind. in other news, president obama said he wanted to close gitmo. he is that he had four years ago. folks the obama administration is reviving these old stories because they are scared. they are worried with 300 million americans heading out to the backyard barbecues this weekend the only thing we will be talking about the obama scandal. benghazi, irs, dorj surveiling fox. they are trying to change the news cycle by sending out these. they chase the rabbits and lucky for you we shoot the rabbits and not chase them. today he decides to do a speech
on foreign policy an hour long speech about drones. >> andrea: i think he picked an issue, not there universal agreement on but controversial. universal agreement it would be a yawn and snooze but the issue of drones. so he is willing to allow the controversy he thinks that will spur debate maybe to cloud over these scandals. it's not going to work. it's definitely not going to work i think he is trying to burn his credentials on national security and he has done it with words and not deeds. it's too late for that. >> eric: you have to admit, yesterday the justice department announced that anwar al-awlaki was killed by a drone. the long speech and gitmo is going to close. come on. >> bob: wait a second. i think he doesn't want to call it a war on terror because it's
a george bush's line but its series of incidents he is talking about. there is terror going on iraq right now. people get killed. in the philippines there are muslim terrorists at work hurting people. where is the united states going to declare, are we going declare war on terror around the world? >> the secretaryment is the president's timing to bring up these big issues, before a long holiday weekend. so many scandals are going to be talked about. >> dana: i would say nice try but not going to work. that speech today was longer than his state of the union address. i couldn't follow it. i don't understand what he was saying. if you are going to something like this pinned pull it off, you have to be very clear. instead you got this sorted meandering speech that wasn't clear. one of the key parts for me and i'm looking forward to reading more about this the separating
responsibility of drone attacks over from the white house, from the president over to a new bureaucratic office of the department of defense. i'm not comfortable with that. if we are going use drones to attack terrorists and other innocent, the president of the united states no matter who are he or she is they need to be responsible for that. you can't take all the responsibilities of government and put them into independent agencies and present pend tend like you have nothing to do with it. >> eric: chasing rabbits. that is great analogy. >> greg: you have to think of the timing. he basically thinks he can talk a scandle to death. this is what he does to get people to leave at cocktail party. he starts talking. i have to say his explanations of the drones was very good. he was trying to explain drones to people who ho might get drones. that speech was not for us. it was for the world.
i think he did a pretty good job on that. the rest of it was unnecessary and long and painful and reminding us that bin laden is dead. we kind of knew that. he flew to vegas after an ambassador died. >> bob: i think the idea they got together -- >> there is no coincidences in politics. >> bob: i don't believe that is the reason he did it. he has been under attack about drones. you may not like it. that is what he did. >> eric: and he should get out in front of the scandals and answer all your questions. he also has to answer questions what the. >> bob: what the responsibility to terrorists. its war against the united states terror. that is what we have to go after. >> dana: what you were talking about killing terrorists with drones. instead, in the same speech he talks about ro closing gitmo.
the most important thing in terrorism, ynt y didn't we know anything. how do you gather intel is by getting the terrorists and interrogating them. seems to me that is missing link. you can look back the f.b.i. has looked back so many times in row. >> what is the cogent policy. they reported yesterday we have the benghazi killer and he is not droning them. think he looks terribly tone deaf to talk about something we already know. >> eric: parents you won't want to miss this one. bob has some advice. don't go away. ♪ ♪ ♪
alcoholics. let me say, spanking once or twice and geting the hell beat out of you every day, i didn't i did become an alcoholic and lots of these things. mine was different. i-but mine was different. i took a whipping every other day. i think there needs to be a distinction. >> i think that spanking can be good for certain. i remember my mom used to spank with me a wood ep spoon but it hurt. and i never did it again. and believe me, i would straighten up. >> what did they spank you with? >> a toothpick because he is so small... >> isn't that funny. >> what would you rather have in society. two parent household with spanking or a single parent household. it is not broken homes, these
are people who believe it is better to be an orphan than have two parents that smoke. their priorities are skewed. >> there is a lot of single family kids that get abused. >> were you spanked in >> absolutely. my parents had a wood ep spoon from greece and i deserved it. they may deserve a crack on the cheeks. it does work. not a beating. >> all right, cheeks, how about you? >> it is an old story, i did something wrong and i got the paddle across and i never did it again. i will relate this. look, my son, it is tough raising kids, i spanked him once for doing something for doing something bad and the guilt i felt. i never did it again.
i have taken stuff away. i think i am supposeed to say i am for spanking. ndon't feel alone. i didn't do that to my kids. i did time outs. there is a mix. spoil the rod and -- what is it? >> i got the rod on a regular basis. it was better than a spoon. >> it depends on the kid though. you can think of other ways to do it. >> on the apartment is what it is. a lot of people can pull that off. spanking didn't work and she had to cut me off from the telephone use. >> that worked. >> that worked. one more thing up next.
>> a group of professors in the political science department in george rush university said they believe in the long run president obama will be a great president and be on mount rushmore. as much as i like obama, i think that is a bit of a reach, maybe another mountain but good try, guys. >> there is something called operation wilhappening in new jersey. new jersey restaurants more than a hundred are putting cheap alcohol in top shelf bottles to cheat the customers and giving them massive headaches. this is so wrong. tgifriday were doing that. if i find bankers club in my margita. >> what are you drinking. >> eric in >> things like $15 a drink.
>> what was that alcohol in a box that was yellow approximate >> that was not alcohol that was wine. nalcohol that was yellow in a box. >> it was in a yellow box. box wine in >> that was apple jous. >> it was out. >> australian. >> it a bag and you had to tie a straw. >> you want to get your stuff in. danna in >> you want to follow veterans and wounded warriors, president george w. bush is hosting the third annual wounded warrior ride. 100 koishgs lometers. and that is pomiles and these wounded warriors, he sack foysed a leg andíw to go through the ride. he doesn't wait around and they get to spend three days in fellowship. follow that in the bush center.org. lots of good pictures and videos
and stuff. >> something i never thought i would say. good job, code pink. >> it was businessmen, and so today, so today, once again. >> there are 102. >> i am about to address it, ma'am, i am about to address. it >> you are the commander in chief. you are going to close it it. >> he loved it and he agrees with everything she said and makes him look conservative. >> one more time for one more thing. >> i was trying to make a point. overreach. this is coming up a lot when the media said you know, the tea party better not over reach in the irs scandal. they don't want you to fight back when you find out the enemies are wrong. they would